HIV/AIDS Research in Correctional Settings

Abstract

Housing a large number of individuals living with or at risk for HIV/AIDS, correctional settings have considerable potential for epidemiological, prevention, and treatment research. However, federal regulations and institutional challenges have limited the extent and types of such research with prisoners. This study examines the degree to which HIV/AIDS correctional researchers report greater challenges than do their non-correctional counterparts. Results indicated that correctional researchers reported significantly more frequent challenges than those in noncorrectional settings, even after controlling for experience; with the dominant difference related to challenges due to the research setting. These findings add empirical data and support previous research in the field; however, additional research should include correctional staff and incarcerated individuals, and explore whether these differences extend to other research topics.

Involving incarcerated individuals in the research process: Perspectives of key stakeholders

“…Are researchers who have worked in correctional settings burned out by the challenges of doing correctional work, so that they cannot begin to fathom yet one more stakeholder groups that needs to be satisfied and heard? Our prior work has shown that research in correctional settings presents unique challenges and barriers (Eldridge et al, 2012;Eldridge, Johnson, Brems, & Corey, 2011;Johnson et al, 2014Johnson et al, , 2015. .…”

“…Because of the stringent safeguards consequent to the Holmesburg and other prison studies, research in prisons has become somewhat arduous and time consuming. These difficulties, combined with unique institutional challenges, including restrictions on prisoners’ movements, emphasis on security, and closed nature, present formidable obstacles to conducting research in correctional settings (Johnson, Kondo, Brems, & Eldridge, 2015). As a result, although valuable research is being conducted in prison settings around the world focusing on a wide range of issues and using a variety of methodological approaches, the scope and amount of health-related research is considerably underwhelming when the extent of the health challenges faced by prisoners is considered.…”

HIV/AIDS Research in Correctional Settings: Perspectives on Training Needs From Researchers and IRB Members

“…Recent findings (Johnson et al, in press) revealed that researchers who conduct HIV/AIDS research in correctional settings reported experiencing significantly more frequent challenges than researchers who conduct HIV/AIDS research in non-correctional settings and that the challenges were particularly related to the nature of the research setting (e.g., navigating policies and procedures, access to participants, obtaining research review and approval, incentives and compensation). These findings are consistent with the fact that participants with correctional experience identified a larger number of training topics.…”

“…We have previously highlighted the paucity of knowledge of federal regulations for protections of prisoners as research participants (Johnson et al, 2014) and ethical challenges related to research in correctional settings (Eldridge et al, 2012; Johnson et al, in press). The findings reported here expand our prior reports by identifying the specific areas of training desired.…”

“…Expanding on these findings, a recent study compared the frequency of challenges experienced when conducting HIV/AIDS research in correctional and non-correctional settings, and found that overwhelmingly, correctional researchers experienced more frequent challenges, particularly with regard to the research setting (i.e., navigating policies and procedures, dealing with interruptions and delays, obtaining research review and approval, and gaining access to research participants). In addition, correctional researchers expressed experiencing more frequent challenges related to determining compensation or incentives for research participation, ensuring voluntary and informed consent, and maintaining retention during follow-up (Johnson, Kondo, & Eldridge, in press). …”